Jump to content



Photo

Atlas Shrugged Movie


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#41 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 20 November 2011 - 07:20 PM

Rand, and her husband, did not make enough money in their careers to support themselves in their elder years; they had to turn to both Social Security and Medicare. She provided the excuse that she had been forced by the government to pay into these programs and therefore it was not hypocritical to lap at the government trough.


AMEN! I'm going to get on every government program that I can, along with everyone else.
It used to be that parents cared for their children then children cared for their aged parents.
Now the government cares for everybody, cradle to grave.


Good for you and good for the economy. Spend it and help give someone else income, increase our GDP. Save it, it not only makes its way back to the govt but on the way, it is lent out 8-10 times more making us all more wealthy. Two thumbs up! You are a patriot!

My question is:
"Does it create a "moral hazard" to imply to individuals (or banks, or Solyndra, or GM) that they don't have to worry about the future because someone else will carry THEIR BURDEN?

I agree. I can't tell you how many MFers that need to be perp walked.


However, do we have to be stupid about it? Do we throw the baby out with the bath water? Do we need thousands more out of work? Do we need to give up producing autos in this country? Do we not take risks in alternative energy development because the Chinese flood our markets with silicone chips.

Do you have any doubt that our being stupid about this is one of the big reasons China is cleaning our clocks?
John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?

#42 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 20 November 2011 - 07:57 PM

AMEN! I'm going to get on every government program that I can, along with everyone else.
It used to be that parents cared for their children then children cared for their aged parents.
Now the government cares for everybody, cradle to grave.

My question is:
"Does it create a "moral hazard" to imply to individuals (or banks, or Solyndra, or GM) that they don't have to worry about the future because someone else will carry THEIR BURDEN?


Amen!+1 I'm going to get when I can.

I feel like a fool when I have to pay for things that are now free for some people these days - cell phones, DSL, full price for food. I've never collected one day of unemployment insurance. I've always paid my bills, taxes and SS.

There is nothing to be gained by not taking SS. Give it away if you want but don't leave it on the table.


Good for you! Another patriot! Keep spending, it gives others incomes, it increases GDP, it makes us all wealthier.

Now, those unemployed. If we just let them starve, there could be some jobs created by the need to produce more body bags, picking them off the streets, and cremating them. However, most of them are women and children so we wouldn't perhaps get the biggest bang for the buck.

You know, if instead they get their unemployment check, they would spend it and then they could be as patriotic as you.

Isn't that weird that your taxes haven't gone up or there's been no inflation caused by their spending? Let's see, their spending goes into the numerator and zero cost goes into the denominator. Why, that gives us a ROI of infinity. Weird how that works.

Just a thought. :rolleyes:
John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?

#43 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 20 November 2011 - 08:09 PM

Pay full price for food...


There is a grocery store here in Tulsa in an area devastated by government projects and policy.
(It was the setting for "Spatula City" at 6207 S. Peoria in Weird Al's movie UHF.)

I went in there recently and was shocked by the high price of their groceries.
Personally I look for bargains and often shop at ALDI.
I was also shocked to see that the shoppers there had little concern for the price, since in reality I was paying for their food via government programs.

My EBT: I just swipe my EBT.


Wow, no wonder my MCD stock has taken off over the last couple decades, AND my federal taxes has gone down.

Let's check my Return on Investment (ROI) -

Food stamps have made my MCD investment go up - big plus in the numerator. My taxes have gone down; big drop in the denominator. Holy cow, my ROI has gone through the roof.

And, I haven't had to step over people that have starved to death!

Gawd, I love America!
John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?

#44 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 20 November 2011 - 08:30 PM

Rand, and her husband, did not make enough money in their careers to support themselves in their elder years; they had to turn to both Social Security and Medicare. She provided the excuse that she had been forced by the government to pay into these programs and therefore it was not hypocritical to lap at the government trough.

However, if one looks at it 'objectively,' it is clear that she did not pay into the programs as much as she got out of them. And what little she did pay in would have more than likely been squandered away with the rest of her wealth by a lifestyle aimed at giving the appearance of success that, in fact, she could not afford.

She represents perhaps the epitome of what the programs were set up to achieve - providing for those in their elder years that perhaps did not make the best decisions or were unlucky or were self-deluded about how the real world actually works. The programs provide for such people in a way that is least burdensome and intrusive to the rest of us.

You can point these realities out to folks, but I have found it makes little difference in their thinking - they still ill believe in magic ponies --- whether "objectively" or not. :rolleyes:


Take as much as they offer you


And thank you for being a patriot and either spending that money in the economy and creating incomes or lending it back to our government (pssst, they really don't need you to do that, but it makes everybody feel better.... because, well, most of us are ignorant about the fact that you don't really need to do that. It's a lot like young kids and Santa Claus - brings comfort to them.)

....and thus hasten the inevitable failure. That is moral, good, and proper.


... and just how would that work? You do know that these programs are funded in dollars that only the federal govt can issue? I don't think they're going to run out of paper and ink and even less likely they'll run out of electrons - so how does this failure actually come about? You know your talking about a monetarily-sovereign nation that owes all its debt in the currency that it alone can issue; it's not some fantasy privately-owned rail line, right? :rolleyes:

Believe me, I know this blows your mind and probable makes you angry. But really, have you ever really thought about it honestly with an open mind? Most all have not. In the markets, what do we generally know about being just in the crowd?
John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?

#45 Rogerdodger

Rogerdodger

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 24,828 posts

Posted 20 November 2011 - 09:12 PM

The vast majority of people don't get it. And it is not a matter of intelligence; it is about being wedded to a mythology and relying on mass cognitive dissonance to defend it. It is the primary source of nearly all economic problems in the world today or at least their resolution. Grasping it leads to a much deeper understanding of the world today..... and it can be very very profitable.
It also makes what most people have to say in heated SS arguments, whether supporters or detractors, simply laughable.


My mass cognitive dissonance prompted me to re-characterize my business into a sub-s corporation back in the mid 1980's.
I was able to cut payments into the Ponzi scheme of SS by taking a smaller salary and receive much of my business profits as corporate dividends which are not subject to SS.
That saved money represents my talents, my work, my skills and my life, which YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO CLAIM.
HAVE YOU ever really thought about THAT honestly with an open mind?

That saved money was invested into real estate & rental property.
With the invested savings in just the first year, I have now received about a grand a month for 25 years already!
That's $300,000 in my pocket ALREADY, PLUS appreciation on the property, PLUS the yearly savings on SS payments.
Additionally my heirs will actually have an inheritance.

Talk to me about reality not mythology. :lol:

http://www.nationalc...urdock1197.html
The National Center for Health Statistics reports that black males born in 1992 can expect to live to age 65, while white males born that same year can plan to live 73.9 years. While black females born in 1992 can expect to 73.9 years of life, white females are expected to spend 79.8 years on Earth.
Since older retirees collect more benefits from those who pay into the scam, Social Security essentially transfers money from working black men and women (who die earlier) to older white women who live the longest. This quickly raises a fundamental question: Given that the retirement age will increase to 67 by the year 2027, is it fair to expect young black men to support a scheme that will not provide them with pension benefits until two years after they can expect to die?
Another factor that compounds this problem is that a lower proportion of blacks tend to enroll in college than do whites. In 1995, only 51 percent of black high school graduates advanced to college. While 63 percent of whites began their post-secondary studies. Consequently, more young blacks begin their working lives earlier than young whites, and thus start paying into Social Security sooner. Nonetheless, as the Cato Institute's Michael Tanner explains: "Because Social Security benefits are based only on the last 35 years of an individual's work history, they will receive no additional benefits despite paying taxes for more years."

Edited by Rogerdodger, 20 November 2011 - 09:26 PM.


#46 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 21 November 2011 - 06:01 AM

The vast majority of people don't get it. And it is not a matter of intelligence; it is about being wedded to a mythology and relying on mass cognitive dissonance to defend it. It is the primary source of nearly all economic problems in the world today or at least their resolution. Grasping it leads to a much deeper understanding of the world today..... and it can be very very profitable.
It also makes what most people have to say in heated SS arguments, whether supporters or detractors, simply laughable.


My mass cognitive dissonance prompted me to re-characterize my business into a sub-s corporation back in the mid 1980's.
I was able to cut payments into the Ponzi scheme of SS by taking a smaller salary and receive much of my business profits as corporate dividends which are not subject to SS.
That saved money represents my talents, my work, my skills and my life, which YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO CLAIM.
HAVE YOU ever really thought about THAT honestly with an open mind?

That saved money was invested into real estate & rental property.
With the invested savings in just the first year, I have now received about a grand a month for 25 years already!
That's $300,000 in my pocket ALREADY, PLUS appreciation on the property, PLUS the yearly savings on SS payments.
Additionally my heirs will actually have an inheritance.


Wow, you are an amazing patriot! And you haven't even mentioned how your wealth accumulation has not only provided incomes for many, many others but you've even provided shelter for either households or businesses and I'm sure at a fair price. Much to be admired here.

I would just note a couple of things -

- Who and what mechanisms enforces all your contracts, leases, deeds, mortgages, banking accounts, brokerage accounts? If you had to rely on your own guns and ammo, how long do you think you would last? Even if you could hold out, what do you think would happen to our society, economy? How valuable would your holdings be that you could hold onto? How much quality would your life have?

- You keep talking about dollars - most of that is in electrons, some of that is in paper-and-ink - who and what mechanism gives that value? What would happen to your worth if those dollars where worthless? How much would you pay to keep those dollars worth something? If keeping your wealth depended on someone making a claim on a relatively small portion of if (as well as others' wealth) would you continue to whine about it as much?

Talk to me about reality not mythology.


I just did - if you were paying attention. ;)

But lets go further down the rabbit hole if you're willing to take the "blue pill" -

.... Social Security essentially transfers money from working black men and women (who die earlier) to older white women who live the longest.....


How exactly does that work? Do you think the govt has some big warehouse where all the dollars (in either paper-and-ink or electrons) go to be stored after collection and then 'transferred' to someone else when the time comes? You know about the special SS Trust bonds held in a single file cabinet in some backroom of an out-of-the-way SS office in Ankron, Ohio - do you really think Timmy goes down there with the magic key and picks one of those $100 million bonds up and takes it over to big Ben to cash before sending checks out to grandma?

If you gave it some thought, you would likely conclude that this does not (and will never) actually happen. Something else is going on than a 'transfer' but folks insist on entire heated arguments based on such mythological 'transfer.' It's called cognitive disassociation. :swoon:
John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?

#47 Rogerdodger

Rogerdodger

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 24,828 posts

Posted 21 November 2011 - 11:00 AM

"Making a claim on a relatively small portion of" anyone's life without their consent is what the slave owners thought was a good thing for the "common good." Is it OK to own slaves if they get weekend's off? Holidays too? I'm just wondering what portion you demand of other's lives.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 21 November 2011 - 11:10 AM.


#48 salsabob

salsabob

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,164 posts

Posted 21 November 2011 - 11:28 AM

"Making a claim on a relatively small portion of" anyone's life without their consent is what the slave owners thought was a good thing for the "common good."
Is it OK to own slaves if they get weekend's off? Holidays too?
I'm just wondering what portion you demand of other's lives.


It's not slavery when you have the choice not to participate in the dollar economy.

However, if you want to use our society's currency and all that stands behind it, it comes with a price. If you use the currency and don't pay your taxes, you will go to jail. If you use the currency, pay your taxes and whine about it as slavery, that's just a little bit of hypocrisy and not jail worthy. :lol:

By the way, don't you find it interestng that the Federal Debt Super Committee failed and people are pouring money into federal securities the day after. How does your worldview square that? :rolleyes:
John Galt shrugged, outsourced to Red China and opened a hedge fund for unregulated securitized credit derivatives.

If the world didn't suck, wouldn't we all just fly off?